stuff that came out of EN202 by moscowlet's not start a comparison of coursework numbers across universities

many nodes by randir, at the noder's request:
stuff that came out of en202 (an index that contained most of the following),
to be in love,
my time to be a star,
the hit,
the hit - part I,
the hit - part II,
the hit - part III,
entrance & passage,
portal (spain),
Maitland Bridge No. 2 (Ralston Crawford),
aray,
lolo,
tita,
The Second Monday of October (Observed),
squish,
i don't care,
random poem from EN 202,
flip,
the stain,
final acceptance,
a fall of rain,
open air market,
La Japonaise (Monet),
Colorado Boulevard,
drunkenmonkey,
en route,
ride the t,
i buy flowers, and
resignation letters.

Engineers and Computer Scientists on a Train by Wigsduplicated another telling of this humorous story

Wigs says Hi, I've been out of the country for the last month and have just got back to find my Engineers and Computer Scientists on a Train w/u eaten. The reason put forward being that it was "duplicated" at "Three engineers and three accountants were traveling by train to a conference" but I can't find that w/u. The closest thing I found was Ticket, please. but that is just a recent w/u while mine was from 2000.
Wigs says I'm finding it hard to understand what happened. Could you please clear it up for me? Thanks in advance.
You said "Hi Wigs. Yes, I deleted your WU of the "engineers and accountants on a train" joke earlier this month. The situation was that we had three tellings of this joke in the database under different titles. As I read through them, I felt that one was stronger than the others. A totally subjective issue; a joke is a special kind of narrative that presents a story we already know and is judged purely on its style, not its informational content. So, I made two deletions, of your WU, and the WU originally at ticket, please. Then I was faced with the question of how we index jokes into the database. It came to me that we when we read a joke in a different way than we listen or tell one. And when reading, what we look for is the punchline more than the story itself. On this, I had the WU I referenced to you moved to ticket, please.

Crescent fresh by aaroninso you've identified an aspect of geek literature with which we all should be familiar, but just quoting the source doesn't explain why itshould enter or remain our common parlance

FINUX by postwaveno one wants to read a node for every computer OS fictionalized by a genre author

FINUX by crypto_studentno one wants to read a node for every computer OS mentioned in a book

FINUX by jodrella description of a now defunct project to build an open-source UNIX operating system for notebook computers, named in reference to a widely read oversize piece of genre fiction, entombed on sourceforge

FINUX by fi_chinceby a new noder who was counseled on the problems inherent in adding a very short WU to a series of short WUs

Cooled

Other

My Sincere Apologies

I have been trying to spend more time helping noders by sending personal /msgs. Unfortunately, I suck at it. For this, I am truly sorry. Please keep in mind that even if my /msg says your writeup sucks golfballs through a garden hose, bears little resemblance to Standard English, and is factually wrong and morally repugnant, the fact that I sent it means I think your writing is interesting and that you are a cool person.

No, really!

Judgment v. Judgement

Based on what I can find on the net including but not limited to Webster 1913, these are variant spellings of the same word. U.S. style references unanimously prefer judgment, but I found one U.K. and one Canadian style guide which insisted upon judgement.

I thought (and I don't know where I got the idea) that these words refer to two different things: judgment is the result of judging (and thus would be the word to use in all legal matters) whereas judgement is the faculty of discernment or discretion. So one could say: "The judge exercised poor judgement in entering that judgment."

Is this a personal delusion or does it reflect real usage? Please /msg me if you find support for my theory.

Update:Gritchka has /msg'd me with additional support for the theory that I am suffering from self-conjured grammatical delusions. Now I'm scared.

Do as I say, not as I do

The damn-near-omniscient Pseudo_Intellectual busted me on a fact error in triclavianism. I thought it was a neologism, but he found a reference to use of the term in the 19th Century. I wouldn't feel so bad about that except he found the reference on the Internet, not some dusty old tome of dogmatics he found in a yard sale. Lesson learned: before announcing to the world that something is unique or new, it's probably a good idea to google a term and read all the results, at least those on the first page.